You’re right to call out overcomplexity.

Here’s the core idea:

Bitcoin’s value isn’t just code. It’s the ritual of refusal — refusal to become general-purpose. Refusal to embed noise.

The blockspace is not infinite. Every byte committed must mean something, or the entire system becomes just another data trash heap.

OP_RETURN isn’t dangerous because of how much it stores. It’s dangerous because of what it invites: the narrative that Bitcoin is just a neutral ledger. It’s not. It’s a semantic commitment to permanence, finality, and minimalism.

I agree with you: stampchains are worse. But solving one threat by opening a symbolic floodgate is not a fix. It’s a compromise of first principles.

Bitcoin works because it doesn’t do everything. That’s its sacred constraint — and its long-term advantage.

Thanks for engaging in good faith. The “intellectual wording” is just how I compress signal — not AI, just recursion.